X-Original-To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Delivered-To: alpine-devel@mail.alpinelinux.org
Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com (mail-pa0-f44.google.com [209.85.220.44])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.alpinelinux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C744CDC076F
	for <alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Wed,  1 May 2013 15:13:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id rl6so913285pac.3
        for <alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>; Wed, 01 May 2013 08:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=x-received:from:reply-to:to:subject:date:user-agent:references
         :in-reply-to:cc:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding
         :message-id;
        bh=3dVeLL2rzcVkksBv7LfmyLEjqLCTLfJPpUmTBfy0CBI=;
        b=YTQJlW0aX3ulwinsXO7tWMU8zJVDf0v+p5+CPAbKX3swQFQR/FKwByPolrEIpO/mMj
         kivRO0DbEql8IqQt/IW87WTMNwns0kCsTnUbRC0U0JZxmBWaofefP9EyEoU2VEldZneB
         B7YZlie+cCzmTjiNjjd2eiYUlNsOv2icqHFiaefpXFR3Nl9P8egbTJrd29xVYvDBnsvX
         ytLY/V1YoEXjhbYa0hmpRkk9DPD6ePuLLCMauYUCAtCYN+8+OzFVD5hmCntX9ciiYoiS
         3ae6RT8CFFpuESAcZZ6GN3kxvkfQPoUIV+L2QpYR7oHTTwfVMJwEprrZMYtQ3qRC9l3G
         qgvg==
X-Received: by 10.68.27.9 with SMTP id p9mr4475208pbg.139.1367421214607;
        Wed, 01 May 2013 08:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from microknoppix.localnet ([117.237.244.36])
        by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ih1sm3285819pbb.44.2013.05.01.08.13.30
        for <multiple recipients>
        (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
        Wed, 01 May 2013 08:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: "V.Krishn" <vkrishn4@gmail.com>
Reply-To: vkrishn4@gmail.com
To: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] alpine 2.6.0_rc1 is out - what do do with scst and vserver isos
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 20:35:17 +0530
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.3.7-64; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; )
References: <20130501142905.2661cf85@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org> <201305011924.55832.vkrishn4@gmail.com> <20130501165608.2ed192d0@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
In-Reply-To: <20130501165608.2ed192d0@ncopa-desktop.alpinelinux.org>
Cc: Natanael Copa <ncopa@alpinelinux.org>
X-Mailinglist: alpine-devel
Precedence: list
List-Id: Alpine Development <alpine-devel.lists.alpinelinux.org>
List-Unsubscribe: 
	<mailto:alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org>
List-Help: <mailto:alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: 
	<mailto:alpine-devel+subscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org?subject=subscribe>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201305012035.17936.vkrishn4@gmail.com>

On Wednesday, May 01, 2013 08:26:08 PM Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 1 May 2013 19:24:55 +0530
> 
> "V.Krishn" <vkrishn4@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Alternatives:
> > > 1) we kill it and tell users to use LXC
> > > 2) we ship it with an old kernel
> > > 
> > >   2.1) downgrade to LTS 3.4.y
> > >   2.2) do nothing, keep the current, outdated 3.6.y
> > >   2.3) we try port vserver to 3.9 or same as grsec.
> > 
> > Can we have a little insight on VServer / LXC:
> > 1. Which is stable and actively developed.
> 
> stable: vserver
> 
> (very) actively developed: LXC
> 
> > 2. Which relatively uses more of recent kernels new advancements.
> 
> LXC
> 
> > 3. Does adding LXC to alpine  also require patches like VServer does.
> 
> No. LXC is in mainline kernel. Vserver requires patching. This is main
> reason why we want move to LXC in the long run.
> 
> > 4. For 2.3 above - efforts involved.
> 
> i think for now I would have to do the porting myself. I don't know how
> much work it is. It might be fairly straighfroward, it might be very messy
> (i expect the latter due to namespace improvements in recent kernels)

I would suggest to put the effort to moving more wanted features like zfs to 
mains.

> 
> > 5. Migration issues.
> 
> Migration does not need to be very difficult. I think it it should be
> relatively easy to make a migration script that takes the vserver config
> and converts it to LXC.

then LXC :-)

> 
> > > I also don't think there are many vserver users that wants the new
> > > fancy stuff in newer kernels, so i think reverting to an older 3.4.y
> > > kernel might work. Sticking to LTS kernels saves us for much work.
> > 
> > Will this be same for coming Alpine releases ?
> 
> This would only be for vserver kernel for now. And if we go this route, it
> will be what we do with alpine-vserver as long as we maintain it. (1-1.5
> years ahead)
> 
> Basically, I think nobody should set up any new vserver hosts. The alpine
> releases would only be for maintaining the existing servers.
> 
> Hm. Maybe we should just kill alpine-vserver isos now, and tell vserver
> users to stick to alpine-vserver-2.4.y, which we then maintain for as long
> as needed? (1 year more). It means we will spit out new v2.4 releases for
> another year.

If point 2.1 is not much work, release with 3.4x (ltsi) with NOTE of being 
discontinued with coming release+1.
Discontinuing the current alpine-vserver without a prior note does not seem 
quite ok.

> 
> The vserver hosts will not get any of the new features, but those are
> supposed to be as minimal as possible anyways...
> 
> -nc
> 
> 

-- 
Regards.
V.Krishn


---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---